1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to tiltable wheeled containers used for refuse and recycling storage, hitching and movement.
2. Description of Prior Art
Recycling bins have been used to store and move materials for over 40 years. The methods used are different for commercial and residential. Recycling was introduced long after refuse collection had be in place and has been treated as an independent operation. At first recyclable materials were piled separately, then bundled, then placed in a container, then more sophisticated containers were developed having multiple or divided containment areas. The problem with multiple bin units was that the contents had to be emptied into different larger containers making this a difficult task that required lifting all the contents and blocking the contents that were not to be dumped into the larger container . Residential recycle bin designs have been constrained by cost and lifting weight. The higher demand for separation of different recyclables has resulted in the need for two or more bins. Simple bins have been made stackable to reduce space and carts have been made to move the bins to the curb.
Recycle bins are presently a simple rectangular box with an edge for lifting and drain holes in the bottom since there is no cover from rain or snow. The size is determined by the lifting weight for the worst case scenario of wet newspaper. This bin requires bending to lift and must be held away from legs due to filth on the bin or rainwater that drips out of tilted cans and jars. This is very difficult especially for seniors or people with back problems. Recycle bins with wheels have not been commercially successful due to the maximum lifting weight does not allow the height of the container to reach an ergonomically suitable height to wheel the container. If the maximum size container was stretched to that height of about 34 inches free standing, then the base would be too small to be stable. The conventional 32 gallon wheeled refuse containers are already disliked by the collection workers for their instability and their narrow wheel base of the cylindrical shaped containers makes them difficult to roll. This has lead to square based containers to increase the wheel base and to prevent rolling in the wind when empty, even though the cylindrical shape provides greater structural integrity and simplicity of manufacture. The larger 60 gallon containers will not be emptied by the collection workers due to their excessive weight. Refuse and recycle containers that have dividers vertically such as in U.S. Pat. No. 4,834,253 to Crine are to difficult to dump because the entire weight must be lifted while only one portion is dumped and the remainder portions blocked.
The recycling cart of U.S. Pat. No. 5,192,092 to DIBENEDETTO (1991) is an expensive item by itself that would have to be unloaded and taken away from the curb or risk theft. The cart would then be brought back to the curb to pick up the empty bins. The cart still requires bins of which the owner may already have. The owner's bins may not fit the cart since recycle bins vary in dimension thus making universal cart manufacture difficult. The bins must also be secured and unsecured to the cart for rolling. The cart and bin of U.S. Pat. No. 4,821,903 to Hayes (1988) has the same problems of expense and theft but bins do not require securing. The bins are however custom made and are expensive to make and unsuitable for newspaper that would require “sliding in” instead of being “tossed on a pile”.
The stackable refuse system of U.S. Pat. No. 5,445,397 to EVANS (1994) offers a more economically viable solution for a multiple bin unit. It also has the advantage of nesting which allows for efficient distribution. It also has the advantage of forming a rigid entity from several bins by means of a flexible strap with a clasp, thus providing the required ergonomic height for tilt and rolling and reducing the effective lifting weight upon detachment. However the method of securing to form a rigid entity is not a system that secures individual bins to each other (adjoining bins) but rather a strap that compresses a number of bins and wheel assembly to form a single rigid entity that can be tilted. The wheels must be added by a separate wheel assembly because there is no individual means of securing wheels to of bottom bin or added by the alternate embodiment, of a cart, to overcome this problem. The wheels are not integral with the bottom bin resulting in additional user labor. The preferred embodiment has lids because if stacked without them it would result in the unit sloping over the wheels. The alternative embodiment uses an expensive metal tubing cart which would require the lids as well to avoid the sloping problem but then allows for the elimination of the flexible strap and having to bend over to pick it up. This design cannot be blow moulded. The wheel base of the preferred embodiment will not nest within itself thus adding to the distribution cost, and the metal frame cart is even more cumbersome to ship. The lids add expense and require the additional labor of securing or removal upon dumping and then reassembly.
Wheeled objects that are tilted for rolling have never been secured together from their free standing position to form a single entity wheeled cart whether hitched or castor wheeled. Two wheel tilt and roll containers or any similar tilt and roll device, such as a luggage container, has never been hitched at the top end nor has there been a way to tilt the devices after being hitched. Trains of containers have be made for commercial application using hitched or linked dollies. These systems have the following disadvantages: requires independent dolly, the dolly has 4 wheels for stability, some or all of the wheels must have the ability to swivel to allow the train to go around corners, the castor wheels are small to keep reduce cost as well as reduce over all height to minimize vertical instability. The small wheels and instability limited the terrain to smooth indoor surfaces due to the inability for small wheels and swivel castors to roll over large bumps. The operator must be in a bent over position including the work and hardware to connect the containers to dollies. This work must the be undone and redone if there are any steps or stairs because the container dolly units cannot move independently in the vertical direction and the upper lateral movement is aggravated due to the height of the container since they are free to move independently at the top. Unless all 4 of the castors on the dollies are swivel type, the direction of train movement cannot be reversed and containers must be locked to the dollies thus limiting versatility.